750 EVO vs. 850 EVO

[stobbe]

Hey guys, I'm planning on changing my laptop 5400rpm HDD to a SSD, and add a boot SSD in my desktop.

 

That said, I have been looking for a good 850 EVO 250GB deal and while looking I stumbled upon a 750 Evo 250GB, but I didn't find many reviews of this SSD, all I can really tell is that there it seems to be a more "budget oriented version" of the 850 EVO.

 

Given the price difference between both, Is there much of a difference for working with programming (in my laptop, while at the college) and with gaming (in my desktop) with one or the other?

[2FA]

I'm guessing that it uses a cheaper type NAND memory with lower expected life and lower speed.

[Telebubbies]

850 evo will be better.. 

[steezemageeze]

http://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/samsung-750-evo-ssd-review-120gb250gb/

 

Dunno if you've read this or not but they seem to give it a good review. I've never actually heard of the 750 EVO, how much cheaper is it than the 850? Unless it's a pretty big gap and you're on a tight budget I'd say stick with the tried and true 850.

[zMeul]

if you're going for the price, maybe

otherwise, don't bother with the 750 EVO

 

http://anandtech.com/show/10258/the-samsung-750-evo-120gb-250gb-ssd-review-a-return-to-planar-nand

[Hunter7263]

The 750 was recently released even though its a lower number. It doesnt use the fancy 3d NAND chips like the 850 and thus is cheaper to manufacture. Its speed is pretty on par but it max capacity is lower. Most SSD's even budget ones are going to be in the upper 400mb/s to 500mb/s range and they are easily 3-5 times faster than regular HDDs. Personally i like ADATA drives. They tend to be cheaper and are pretty solid.

[stobbe]

43 minutes ago, DeadEyePsycho said:

I'm guessing that it uses a cheaper type NAND memory with lower expected life and lower speed.

That's what I thought after having a look at the specs in Samsung's website of both (750 EVO and 850 EVO)

38 minutes ago, steezemageeze said:

http://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/samsung-750-evo-ssd-review-120gb250gb/

 

Dunno if you've read this or not but they seem to give it a good review. I've never actually heard of the 750 EVO, how much cheaper is it than the 850? Unless it's a pretty big gap and you're on a tight budget I'd say stick with the tried and true 850.

The 750 EVO would cost around 108 USD, and the 850 EVO around 143 USD (yes, I know the prices are high, gotta love living in Brazil), I'm not really in a budget, but the difference is too big to ignore, but not too big to discard the 850 EVO as a possible buy.

34 minutes ago, zMeul said:

if you're going for the price, maybe

otherwise, don't bother with the 750 EVO

 

http://anandtech.com/show/10258/the-samsung-750-evo-120gb-250gb-ssd-review-a-return-to-planar-nand

I was considering buying the 750 EVO for the laptop (simpler use) and the 850 EVO for my desktop (my main rig, where I do mostly gaming), maybe I should just gather a little more and get 850 EVOs for both.

32 minutes ago, Hunter7263 said:

The 750 was recently released even though its a lower number. It doesnt use the fancy 3d NAND chips like the 850 and thus is cheaper to manufacture. Its speed is pretty on par but it max capacity is lower. Most SSD's even budget ones are going to be in the upper 400mb/s to 500mb/s range and they are easily 3-5 times faster than regular HDDs. Personally i like ADATA drives. They tend to be cheaper and are pretty solid.

I found an ADATA 240GB SSD for a little less than the 750 EVO (around 103 USD for the ADATA), would it be a better alternative to the 750 EVO, or is it equivalent?

 

[Hunter7263]

If I had to estimate the ADATA should be sitting right where the 750 is. They both use the planar NAND chips which is why they are cheaper. Both have excellent controllers so speed should be up there with no problems. It should be noted that they are both rated for less writes than the 850 if i remember correctly. That being said they both are rated at like their capacity of writes everyday for like 3 years compared to the 850's 5 years. Unless youre constantly doing something like using it to record streams (even then you'd have to do that like 24/7) chances are you will never even come close to that.

[zMeul]

59 minutes ago, HolyMoses said:

I found an ADATA 240GB SSD for a little less than the 750 EVO (around 103 USD for the ADATA), would it be a better alternative to the 750 EVO, or is it equivalent?

don't buy the SP550 ones, they're suffering from cell voltage drift

I RMAed mine two times already

 

this just after 3 weeks in usage (SATAII controller):

[stobbe]

11 minutes ago, zMeul said:

don't buy the SP550 ones, they're suffering from cell voltage drift

I RMAed mine two times already

 

this just after 3 weeks in usage (SATAII controller):

Ok, I think that settles it, I'm getting 850 EVOs for both systems, even if I need to buy them one at a time

[SuperJ]

Just thought I'd add my 2 cents to this older topic.  

I own(ed) three 850 Evo's in three different machines(all 250GB), but put a 750 EVO 250GB in my recent AMD FX refresh.  Honestly the real world performance is not perceivably different than the 850.  For me in Canada the 750 was about 25% cheaper than the 850, and it was going in an older machine so I cheaped out, and couldn't be happier.

I change out my hardware within 3 years typically so I'm not really concerned about the life span (SSD life span is surrounded in FUD anyways).

IMHO, unless you are stepping up to NVME most top tier SATA based SSDs will perform basically the same under real world conditions.  Even if they bench quite a bit differently.

[Mortis Angelus]

On 28.4.2016 at 10:42 PM, Hunter7263 said:

The 750 was recently released even though its a lower number. It doesnt use the fancy 3d NAND chips like the 850 and thus is cheaper to manufacture. Its speed is pretty on par but it max capacity is lower.

So if only needing a 250 GB drive, the 750 would be the preferred one then? Or why would you need the 3D NAND-chips for something as small as a 250 GB?